Details of the task
This assignment requires you to:
a) Assess existing practice using operations theory, concepts and tools.
b) Compare the operation with best practice.
c) Suggest a reason for your findings.
During the semester, you should have created a range of presentations that include an explanation of theory. Three of these will make up the “appendix”. You are not expected to describe the theory a second time. You are expected to use it. Your research should focus on establishing the nature of operations in your chosen case study.
For this piece of work, your “appendices” will be as important as the written work, and will attract half of the marks. You will need to select three pieces of material that you have presented in class as formative work. Choose the three that contain the theory and tools that best support your analysis.
You are now in a position to complete the written part of your submission: The body of your assessment should focus on reapplying those tools and theories to your chosen organisation in order to establish the extent it demonstrates good practice.
The key term in this assignment is justify. This means that you should try to find the evidence to support the operational choices so that you can persuade your reader that the best decisions have been made.
A suggested structure for your report:
If you choose to structure the main body of your work in a different way, make sure you provide similar coverage of the material.
Introduction: 75 words
1. Introduce the key topics of the report (The organisation concerned and operations). A common error is for students to think this relates to the historical development of the issue when its past often has little relevance to current situations. This background material should make the purpose of the report relevant. You may find it appropriate even at this early stage to use theoretical concepts.
2. Explain the purpose of the report. This should be phrased in the terms you would expect to use if the report was to be handed as a professional consultancy report to the organisation concerned.
3. Outline the structure of your response.
4. Define any key terms (this might have been achieved in “1” above).
5. Be engaging and professional. By this, you should try to avoid the trap of starting the report with the words “in this report I am going to …” or similar.
Main Body: 600 words
Keep the headings informative, and remember that “main body” is not appropriate.
Section 1: Outline the operation. You should aim at only including description that you will rely on to substantiate your analysis.
Section 2: Analysis of the organisation:
• Using diagnostic tools
• Comparing with theory
Show the extent that the operation is demonstrating good practice.
• Indicate where good practice is evident and/or
• explain why you consider it to be good practice.
Section 3: Explain your findings:
• If your analysis suggests that the organisation is only demonstrating good practice, section 2 will need to be thorough and this section will not be needed.
• If your analysis suggests that you cannot justify their operation, then this section should explain reasons for this.
Conclusion: 75 words
1. Briefly refer back to your task
2. Summarise the key issues raised in sections 1 – 3 the main body.
3. Summarise your findings
It should not:
1. Contain any information that has not been discussed in the main body,
2. Summarise the topics covered – e.g. “this report reviewed the operations undertaken and identified where improvements can be made.” without summarising the actual content (a common mistake).
3. Contain any recommendations.
Care should be taken with grammar and spelling and your work should be referenced in accordance with Cite them Right.
Provide your word count at the end of the report:
If you prepare a good answer, you will probably find the word limit quite tight:
• Do make sure that you make sure that all your content is relevant.
• Do not repeat anything that is covered in your appendices.
• Refer your reader to each appendix when discussing the associated concept.
• Remember: You are not just presenting information. You should try to persuade your reader that you are right.
This part of your work will be marked using the mark awarded at the point of presenting the material in your seminar and submitted to Turnitin by the stipulated date – if you intend to submit the work without alteration. You will need to list the presentations you intend to refer to on the front sheet.
What should I do if I received poor feedback for my presentation?
You will be permitted to adjust your appendix, and the submission will be remarked. You will receive no higher than 50% for that particular appendix.
What should I do if we did not attend a seminar and do not have a necessary appendix?
You will be permitted to create your appendix, using the same criteria that applied for the missing seminar task. You will receive no higher than 40% for that particular appendix.
Your word count should not include your title or reference list.
It should be provided at the end of your report. Provide an accurate word count. If your report does not appear to be of the correct length it will be checked.
If you significantly exceed the word count, your work will be penalised, by the same percentage as the percentage by which the word count is exceeded. If your work is significantly shorter, then you will probably have failed to provide the level of detail required.
Your work should be word processed in accordance with the following:
• Font style, Lucida Sans, font size 12
• 1.5 line spacing.
• The page orientation should be ‘portrait’
• Margins on both sides of the page should be no less than 2.5 cm
• Pages should be numbered
• Your name should not appear on the script.
• Your student number should be included on every page.
Submission to Turnitin of Work Submitted for Assessment
Turnitin is an internet-based text matching service that has been developed by a commercial company. It is used, under license, by most UK Universities, including the University of East London. Work that is submitted to Turnitin generates a Turnitin Originality report, showing which parts of it have been reproduced from which sources. The system compares submissions to material that is to be found: on the world-wide web; in its database of previous submissions; and in its growing number of databases of published articles. You should not assume that a Turnitin Originality report with a low similarity index is evidence that the piece of work concerned is free from plagiarism.
Our policy on the use of Turnitin recognises the educational desirability that all of our students should enjoy the opportunity to self-submit their work to Turnitin (before submitting for assessment). We also recognise that Turnitin Originality Reports will sometimes assist in the identification of plagiarised work submitted for assessment.
Notice is hereby given that all submissions of reports for this Module must be submitted to Turnitin. Detailed guidance on how to submit your work to Turnitin will be made available on this Module’s Moodle site.
If you fail to submit your report to Turnitin, in accordance with the guidance on the Moodle site, you will be awarded a mark of 0 for the component.
The material that you submit to Turnitin will be marked. The deadline applies so you are advised not to submit after 11.00p.m, because it could take some time for your submission to upload, and the delay could cause the work to be received after 11.59. A late submission will receive a mark of zero.
Please be aware that:
• The Turnitin site will advise you that late submissions are accepted. This is only for the purposes of allowing students who are claiming extenuation to submit their work.
• Withdrawal from the module could result in your access to the Turnitin site being unavailable even if you have been reinstated to the module. Please check that you have access to the site during working hours before the due date because you may need to contact your module leader to ask for the link to be reinstated.
Please read the material in the assessment folder and save the document using the format for the name of the document as specified.
a) Provision of necessary background information 10%
b) The application of concepts and tools 20%
c) Analysis of the operation 10%
d) Overall presentation including referencing 10%
a) Explanation of concepts and tools 35%
b) Application of concepts and tools 15% 50%
Assessment criteria explained.
Provision of necessary background information.
The extent to which it fits the subsequent analysis.
Application of concepts and tools
The accuracy and understanding of the concepts and tools that is demonstrated.
Analysis of the operation
Your conclusion, including the supporting reasoning. Could this report be given to the company concerned? Would they consider it demonstrates sufficient understanding of their particular situation?
Structure, writing style and referencing techniques.
(70% or above) Ideas critically analysed
Argument is clear, succinct and well supported.
Evidence of a wide range of reading and some independent thought.
(60-69%) Critical consideration of relevant ideas.
Arguments are precisely defined and appropriately referenced.
The work is structurally sound and well written.
(50-59%) Reasonable understanding of the relevant concepts, but some inconsistencies in application.
Arguments are referenced, but disjointed.
Poor structure, spelling or grammar.
(40-49%) Generally descriptive work with limited evidence of a critical consideration of ideas.
Weaknesses in structure, spelling and grammar.
(below 40%) Uncritical
Argument indicates little use of relevant literature.
Chaotic structure and generally badly written
No reference to theory
You will need to retrieve this assignment if either of the following occur during the semester:
• You fail to achieve 30% or more for this assignment
• You fail to achieve 40% for the module and you failed to achieve 40% or more for this assignment.
You will be expected to complete a similar piece of work for your second attempt. An assignment brief for retrieval will be available on Moodle by the time marks are released